Do you wonder which members of Congress routinely side with the
richest 1 percent and Wall Street? Which lawmakers consistently vote to
cut taxes for the rich, protect off-shore tax havens for transnational
tax dodgers, and ensure that wealth is taxed more favorably than income
from work? Who tirelessly side with global corporations at the expense
of domestic small businesses?

On the other hand, are you curious which members of Congress are
committed to an economy that works for everyone, not just the 1 percent?
What lawmakers back a level playing field between small business and
transnational corporate conglomerates? Who are the voting champions for
people who work for wages, dream of health insurance, and aspire to
education their children without decades of debt?

In the new “Congressional Report Card for the 99 Percent" (full disclosure—I'm a co-author), the Institute for Policy Studies examined 40 different legislation actions in the House and Senate—votes and legislation introduced—to ascertain the real allegiances of
sitting members of Congress. These include votes to extend the Bush tax
cuts for the wealthy, levy a Wall Street speculation tax, invest in
infrastructure, and protect workers and student financial aid.

Not surprisingly, the most promiscuous protectors of the privileged
were Republicans. But 17 lawmakers in the Democratic party also got low
marks. For example, in the U.S. Senate, Montana Senator Jon Tester and
Virginia Senator Jim Webb—sometimes considered progressive—showed up
on the list of “1 Percent Friendly Democrats.” Senators Mark Pryor
(D-AR), Joseph Leiberman (I-CT), Kay Hagan (D-NC) and Ben Nelson (D-NE)
also shared the “1 Percent friendly” distinction.

The Report Card also graded politicians for their commitment to
reducing inequality and boosting the 99 percent. The report’s “Honor
Roll” gives an A-plus grade to 5 members of the U.S. Senate and 14 House
members, including Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Dick Durbin (D-IL),
Al Franken (D-MN), Bernard Sanders (VT-I), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).

Nine Republican members of the House of Representatives got passing
grades in the effort to reduce inequality. These included Rep. Tim
Johnson (R-IL), Walter Jones (R-NC), and Justin Amash (R-MI).

The personal wealth of a politician did not dictate whether they were
allied with the 1 percent or the 99 percent. Of the 20 wealthiest
members of Congress, including the ten richest Republicans and
Democrats, 13 of them got passing grades in reducing inequality and only
1 got an “F” grade. The failing grade went to Congressman Rodney
Frelinghuysen of New Jersey whose $22 million fortune makes him one of
the 16 richest members of Congress. He ranks as the top “rule rigger”
on behalf of the 1 percent, casting votes that only boost his own wealth
and power.

The politics of deflection has worked for decades to divide and
distract voters. If pro-1 percent, pro-Wall Street candidates can get
their constituents to blame the poor, immigrants, people of color, and
gays and lesbians for their economic challenges, then we will likely get
policies that favor the 1 percent at the expense of the 99 percent. But
if voters put on their “99 to 1” special glasses, then we can look
forward to a political realignment in the coming years.

Interested?

Your favored candidates may be outspent, but if they out-organize, they may be able to prevail.

Cutting through the campaign rhetoric and attack ads, here are five
issues we believe should be at the center of the 2012 election, plus one
that has no place in the public sphere.

Corporations often take big helpings of public funds, saying that
they’ll provide jobs in return. But how can communities make sure they
deliver?

Producing in-depth, thoughtful journalism for a better world is expensive – but supporting us isn’t. If you value ad-free independent journalism,
consider subscribing to YES! today.